Hello Israel,
To my knowledge, the lacquer that Steinways is using today in pre-lacquering, is nitrocellulose lacquer, and from what people tell me about the dipping buckets, in various concentrations. Nitrocellulose lacquer with less solids and more thinner generally is used for wood, while nitrocellulose lacquer with more solids and less thinner is generally used for metals. For the most part, nitrocellulose lacquer does have a slightly yellow tint, consistent to the observation you made "that there was something soaked into them much deeper than what a 30-second dip would suggest. Perhaps it was lacquer - someone who saw the color of the stuff said otherwise. Rather bright yellow... In any case, those hammers ended up being rock hard - which is why we had to rinse them out." If you want clear lacquer, you need to buy acrylic, for the most part just used for metals. The acrylic dries harder than the nitrocellulose, which as a result of drying softer, causes the needle to stick more. You just may have received a set that was dipped in a bucket with some extremely dense nitrocellulose lacquer. For us, the important thing is to find something, get used to it, and stick with it. It is difficult when people try to force you to use lacquer you are not accustomed to, and can undo what you learned in the process of juicing over the years.
We also need to observe that the hardness of Steinway felt changes over the years. Back in the late 70's and early 80's the hammers were softer than today. In fact, I would bet that even some of the new Boston pianos that arrived with the Steinways here at CCM had softer hammers than the newer Steinway hammers, difficult to determine because of the pre-lacquering process now used somewhat inconsistently. Because hammer density itself apart from hardening is never a constant, there is the possibility that a very experienced technician may over-lacquer a Steinway hammer while dipping it at the factory regardless of lacquer concentration.
I have heard all this Steinway hammer stuff ad nauseam ad infinitum. I would guess most of the people in this discussion who did not give up on Steinway hammers have more experience with needling them then I, though I have experience with them going back over 20 years. However I would like to add some observations about juicing that appears to be an obsolete understanding of voicing American Steinway hammers today.
Back in the 80's and 90's, Steinway started cropping tails, and sent out otherwise faulty hammers. As much a pain as it was, if the hammers were not satisfactory, we sent them back to Steinway, got our money back, or got another set. I think sometimes we sent back sets of hammers three times over. If you feel that a set you get is faulty, why not send them back? Make them send you an adequate set. However, it is important to observe a huge improvement has developed from the parts division since then. Finding a solution for receiving inadequate pre-lacquered hammers is more difficult. That alone could be an argument against pre-lacquering. You to some extent won't know until hanging them, and then it is too late, though it could include damage you personally caused.
I heard some things from people taught in the old school "Steinway Academy" that I never hear from the ones who have recently been trained at the factory. Some new trainees say you cannot ruin an American Steinway hammer. Perhaps we are dealing with a more resilient hammer than the old school was. Others have claimed to me you cannot over-needle a Steinway hammer, and you simply can juice needle juice needle juice needle juice needle juice needle juice needle juice needle until your hearts' content, people who get extremely upset when I say what some of the old school Steinway people use to say. Again, the old school may be talking about a different hammer than the new school. From my conversations with recent Steinway school graduates, I am about to learn something different from the following when I enter the academy.
The best way to go about lacquering a set of American Steinway hammers, people used to say, is to lacquer few times as possible, and needle little as possible. Part of the challenge for Ken Sloane when he taught me to juice was to juice as few times as possible with as little needling as possible, trying to estimate exactly how much and what concentration of lacquer to use, something determined by how well the solution penetrated, and then to do so evenly as possible, in as few passes as possible. By the way, he used the acrylic lacquer, and the factory approved, because he got good results. For successive coats, contrary to what the factory teaches today, you would juice off the top depending on judgment and solution penetration into hammer. Though in more than one place with more than one way and one piano tech. I have witnessed a confrontation with some heavy-handed Eastern European male who never seems to understand the lacquered Steinway sound that has lead some to the last resort, to using another kind of hammer, some old-schoolers like Ken Sloane succeeded in the concert hall going about voicing American Steinway Hammers with this general approach, and I should probably add, shift pedal needling.
Obviously, Steinway is teaching a completely different method today, and possibly, manufacturing a better, more resilient hammer with better felt than the old school dealt with, capable of more needling. Whether or not any of the problems Stein had related to this, I do not know. I just wanted everybody to know that Steinway did not always teach the things people are learning from Steinway about voicing American Steinway Hammers today, and that it is nitrocellulose lacquer that causes the yellowing.
Glad you improved it,
- Ben
From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of Israel Stein
Sent: Friday, June 12, 2009 2:58 PM
To: caut at ptg.org
Subject: [CAUT] Getting lacquer out of hammers - follow up (David Love)
Fri, 12 Jun 2009 08:35:55 -0700 "David Love" <davidlovepianos at comcast.net><mailto:davidlovepianos at comcast.net>
To: <caut at ptg.org><mailto:caut at ptg.org>
I've heard similar reports on occasion for the prehardened hammers which has
prompted some to insist on getting them raw. The problems I've heard have
more been that the hammers were too hard and people were not able to voice
them down enough especially through the tenor. If the hammers lack power
after the prelacquering then sometimes adding additional lacquer can present
problems as the core felt becomes impervious to additional applications and
it just stays near the surface. This can cause a very bright tone when
played p - mf but when you try and get to fff the hammer collapses and the
power seems to bottom out prematurely.
Thank you, David, for confirming that we here at SFSU are not the only ones to have run into problems with the pre-hardened Steinway hammers on a concert hall "D". What you write above pretty much describes the problems we had with the upper midrange and treble - the bass was fine. The worn out set we replaced was NY Steinway from the early nineties or so - and with them this was a powerful, beautiful sounding piano. With the current vintage pre-hardened hammers the treble came out wimpy - and stayed that way. And yes, (in case someone here is going to tell me that it takes time and playing for the tone to "come out") I had a graduate student play that piano for hours and hours every day last summer - she got so used to it that she used it for her Masters' recital in spite of the voicing issues. But nobody else wanted to play it - and I don't blame them, because the weakness in the treble was obvious. Like I said, they are much better now, after "reprocessing" and relatively light lacquering. Let's see how the students and faculty feel about it come August. In the meantime we are trying to get it some playing time with all the summer renters - we have a kiddie chamber music competition this weekend, and a chamber music festival in July. Graduate students have been few and far between - still recovering from the last semester, I guess...
Israel Stein
For performance Steinways I'm more inclined to go to a different hammer, a
more fully tensioned and harder pressed hammer such as a Hamburg Renner or
even an Abel Select such as Pianotek sells or maybe the Abel naturals from
Brooks. The ability to release tension to the crown on that type of hammer
plus the greater out of the box firmness obviates the use of lacquer (except
maybe on the top most hammers) and gives greater power without the downside
of over lacquering.
The softer, lacquered hammer is fine for their smaller pianos whose upper
end demands aren't as great and whose scale tensions also argue for
something more flexible. Even there, however, I would still ask for them
unhardened so that you can control that yourself or use a Bacon felt hammer
from Ronsen which gives a very similar texture with the use of lacquer. The
difference being that the Ronsen hammer starts out a bit firmer than the
unlacquered Steinway hammer and so the application of lacquer need only be a
fairly modest one.
David Love
www.davidlovepianos.com<http://www.davidlovepianos.com>
-----Original Message-----
From: caut-bounces at ptg.org<mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org> [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of Israel
Stein
Sent: Friday, June 12, 2009 8:14 AM
To: caut at ptg.org<mailto:caut at ptg.org>
Subject: [CAUT] Getting lacquer out of hammers - follow up
Hello again,
For all of you who are claiming success with the pre-hardened Steinway
hammers - how many of you have had success with them on a top-quality
concert hall stage instrument? Which is the situation we found ourselves
in her at SF State. I have used those hammers before also, with good -
even excellent - results. In less demanding situations. But when it came
to the very demanding concert hall use - the hammers, as delivered, fell
short. They never delivered the volume that this instrument is capable
of - pianists complained that it took too much work to get the volume
they needed, and nothing we did could improve that. Flushing the
hardener and starting over gave much more satisfactory results - both in
terms of volume and tone color. Which tells me that having full control
of the hardening process may work better than depending on what they do
in the factory. Of course, there is always the possibility that this set
of hammers is an exception - that for some reason it was overhardened at
the factory. I still prefer, in the future, to put the lacquer where I
want it if i need to use Steinway hammers and not depend on the
factory's alleged 30-second soaking. As long as Steinway makes
un-hardened hammers available - which I believe they do.
Israel Stein
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 10:04:23 -0600
From: Fred Sturm <fssturm at unm.edu><mailto:fssturm at unm.edu>
To: caut at ptg.org<mailto:caut at ptg.org>
Subject: Re: [CAUT] Piano Response or how heavy the action is.
Message-ID: <B19A9EBE-2DFE-41FD-8A99-23894CF78468 at unm.edu><mailto:B19A9EBE-2DFE-41FD-8A99-23894CF78468 at unm.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
On Jun 12, 2009, at 10:16 AM, Richard Brekne wrote:
in the end... it is the voicing of the instrument that is the key
to the pianists sensation of whether the instrument is "good" or
"bad", and most certainly whether the instrument is heavy or light.
Real physical impedance only indirectly affects this perception.
I think the point is very well taken, as long as it isn't taken too
far (too absolutely). I agree that the voicing "speed" (how much
difference in touch it takes to get from "dark" to "bright") is
probably the biggest factor, and probably more apparent than mass and
inertia. And that a fairly large range of weight, whether measured as
DW or as BW, can be coped with as long as it is reasonably even.
I'd throw regulation pretty strongly into the mix, though, especially
if you are dealing with a regulation done by someone who isn't well
trained. I'm thinking particularly of drop and aftertouch. Where these
are excessive, there can be a perception (for good reason) of a heavy
and unresponsive action. Partly it's because there is a lot of spring
pushing back at the bottom of the keystroke. Partly it's too much
distance and excess distance for the finger to go. It also means that
letoff and drop contact are apart from one another, hence there is a
spongy and inexact feel to the action.
I find myself becoming more and more sensitive (speaking as a
pianist) to whether or not the regulation is "in focus," and really
thrown off by inconsistencies and wide parameters. But I guess that is
a different topic, as it isn't a question of heavy/light, but rather
of responsive or not.
Regards,
Fred Sturm
University of New Mexico
fssturm at unm.edu<mailto:fssturm at unm.edu>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 12:08:11 -0400
From: "Sloane, Benjamin (sloaneba)" <sloaneba at ucmail.uc.edu><mailto:sloaneba at ucmail.uc.edu>
To: "'caut at ptg.org'"<mailto:'caut at ptg.org'> <caut at ptg.org><mailto:caut at ptg.org>
Subject: Re: [CAUT] Harpsichord & Organ Maintenance Videos
Message-ID:
<3D6FE30F2F5A9345AA15A87D185AA92F3C6A5A4775 at UCMAILBE2.ad.uc.edu><mailto:3D6FE30F2F5A9345AA15A87D185AA92F3C6A5A4775 at UCMAILBE2.ad.uc.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Hi Paul,
Well, I am glad they are an inspiration to you. Keep looking.
However, I am hoping to steer things in the direction of an instrument, the organ, that in this region seems to have fallen out of favor in the eyes of the PTG, when counterpoised with the harpsichord, far as non-piano endeavors are concerned for the PTG and CAUT. Maybe the climate is different elsewhere. Perhaps a depiction of these in comparison to nature will help me explain.
No matter how a harpsichord is voiced, it still sounds like buzzing flies to me. I hope that does not sound too pejorative. Obviously, they have an appeal of their own and there place here, and part of my job is to help maintain them, though recently we have been contracting out some harpsichord work, not including what for the most part is concert maintenance. However, a well maintained organ sounds like thunder. If the institution I work at needs to secure funding for continuing education in what is called Performance Management here, I would rather get trained to play with lightning, than to swat at flies. Either area would help with the budget problems at CCM created with contract demands, and I see no reason why to favor one over the other in that case at this school.
Good luck with the harpsichord projects!
- Ben
From: caut-bounces at ptg.org<mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org> [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of Paul T Williams
Sent: Friday, June 12, 2009 10:36 AM
To: caut at ptg.org<mailto:caut at ptg.org>
Subject: Re: [CAUT] Harpsichord & Organ Maintenance Videos
Hey Ben,
Thanks so much for the harpsichord videos! I've learned something today on plectra replacement and voicing!! :>) Now...off to some of our harpsichords that are acting up! I'll leave the organ stuff to Mr. Bedient!
Paul
"Sloane, Benjamin (sloaneba)" <sloaneba at ucmail.uc.edu><mailto:sloaneba at ucmail.uc.edu>
Sent by: caut-bounces at ptg.org<mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org>
06/12/2009 09:13 AM
Please respond to
caut at ptg.org<mailto:caut at ptg.org>
To
"caut at ptg.org"<mailto:caut at ptg.org> <caut at ptg.org><mailto:caut at ptg.org>
cc
Subject
[CAUT] Harpsichord & Organ Maintenance Videos
Good morning all,
Thought somebody might find these videos interesting.
These are organ tuning, voicing, & repairing I believe
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CPxaEfFhGI&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdtLvHLqMT0&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrECqw6mHOE&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xze5QRIAO-0&feature=related
And these harpsichord stringing, voicing, and I can?t remember what else
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4uQnibdOdW4&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_rTN7F5QUY&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifaVED5q5Gs&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BqRBYM4YxU&feature=related
Probably won?t start a conversation. Have a good day,
-Ben
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/caut.php/attachments/20090612/d0f53912/attachment.htm><http://ptg.org/pipermail/caut.php/attachments/20090612/d0f53912/attachment.htm>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
CAUT mailing list
CAUT at ptg.org<mailto:CAUT at ptg.org>
http://ptg.org/mailman/listinfo/caut
End of CAUT Digest, Vol 8, Issue 24
***********************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/caut.php/attachments/20090612/2c03d0dd/attachment-0001.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC